3 ms·

> We said no. Then he did it anyways. ... Bombing these people for 8 years, totes cool. That's some quite revisionist history there... The Syrian conflict isnt

> We said no. Then he did it anyways. ... Bombing these people for 8 years, totes cool. That's some quite revisionist history there... The Syrian conflict isnt even that old. It started in 2011. In 2013, US starting supplying arms to syrian rebels. This was our first intervention in the conflict. In Sept 2014, Obama gave his syria speech and Congress authorized action in Syria. Bombing started shortly after w/ other countries participation. How does 2 years suddenly turn into 8? And doesn't Congressional approval for the action, conflict with this idea that Obama was acting in Syria alone?

Consultant32452 10y ago
No, what you believe is the revisionist history. We learned from the wikileaks cables that the US (CIA) has been in Syria funding and training the opposition since as early as 2006. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2011/0418/Cables-reveal-covert-US-support-for-Syria-s-opposition http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2011/0418/... That means that the civil war and the refugee crisis are at least in part the direct results of actions of the United States.
- rgbrenner 10y ago
  here's the document from wikileaks: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/wikileaks-syria/cable1.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/wikileaks... Your link, nor the actual wikileaks document supports the claim that US sent the CIA into Syria in 2006. It talks about funding to Freedom House, American University and others for information, conferences, etc. I think you would have a good point if it were true about CIA involvement.. but I believe people have a right to speech. And that's all that this appears to be. I'm not ready to agree that the US is the source of the Syrian civil war just because we encouraged speech without the approval of a dictator.

Consultant32452 10y ago

No, what you believe is the revisionist history. We learned from the wikileaks cables that the US (CIA) has been in Syria funding and training the opposition since as early as 2006. http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2011/0418/Cables-reveal-covert-US-support-for-Syria-s-opposition http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2011/0418/... That means that the civil war and the refugee crisis are at least in part the direct results of actions of the United States.

rgbrenner 10y ago
here's the document from wikileaks: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/wikileaks-syria/cable1.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/wikileaks... Your link, nor the actual wikileaks document supports the claim that US sent the CIA into Syria in 2006. It talks about funding to Freedom House, American University and others for information, conferences, etc. I think you would have a good point if it were true about CIA involvement.. but I believe people have a right to speech. And that's all that this appears to be. I'm not ready to agree that the US is the source of the Syrian civil war just because we encouraged speech without the approval of a dictator.